Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 Internet speed test! ×

Comment Re: Very Basic Income (Score 1) 618

You need to account for the number of tires per vehicle if you're going to do this analysis. If you want to get technical it's actually the surface area of contact between all of the tires and the ground which are bearing the respective vehicle weight (since a trailer has much larger tires than a motorcycle). -R

Comment AI Motivation Directive? (Score 1) 174

Mr. Kurzweil, Rather than starting with "knowledge" or "input sensors" about the real world, has anyone in the field ever considered an AI built upon a directive of motivation (such as survival)? That's really where all of our behavior stems from, and a machine with billions of factoids but no directive of motivation is just a library. -R

Comment I've identified a potential problem (Score 1) 445

"Racial bias has to be operating, inequities are rampant..."

To assume that gifted people should be scattered equally among all socio-economic demographics is absurd. To the extent that gifted children have gifted parents (which is reasonable), and to the extent that being gifted allows you to avoid poverty in adulthood (which is also reasonable), we should not be surprised at these results.

I guess a point could be made that gifted black parents who had gifted children were not historically given the chance to pull themselves or their children out of poverty, but inequities alone do not indicate any bias.

Comment Re: The Arctic is NOT doomed (Score 1) 125

"Most" are from the 2000s only because those are the easiest to find and falsify (i.e. in the internet age)! You specifically asked for a failed prediction from Al Gore, of which there are many, and easy to find! Makes me believe that perhaps you are choosing not to see a certain perspective.

Comment Re: The Arctic is NOT doomed (Score 1) 125

By "over there" do you mean in America or people with my views on the subject? Because it seems presumptuous to think I deny climate change just because I recognize there have been so many awful, failed predictions. I don't reject the science of climate change but I definitely reject the politics of it, and all of the doomsday scenarios come with a political agenda attached to them!

BTW, I checked in to exactly ONE WUWT claim, arbitrarily picking the last one. Feel free to Google the quote below. Seems pretty unlikely that they would poison such a grand list with a couple of easily falsifiable claims, doesn't it? That's exactly what an Environmentalist would latch on to in order to discredit the rest of them.

"Using computer models, researchers concluded that global warming would raise average annual temperatures nationwide two degrees by 2010." Associated Press, May 15, 1989.

Comment Re: The Arctic is NOT doomed (Score 2) 125

See this is part of the movement. When it comes to nuanced hard data, Environmentalists cite Science...but when it comes to INTERPRETATION of that data they have no problem using every hyperbolic, apocalyptic prediction in every news article they can get their hands on. If these "predictions" don't come to pass it isn't a problem because they can just ask for "peer-reviewed papers" making these predictions. I don't suppose you're old enough to remember the Global Freezing predictions of the 70's? Anyway, failed climate predictions from prominent news and political sources abound if you care to look.

Comment Re:Paul Ehrlich, eh? (Score 1) 149

That's a fair response, and I agree. I just think that, specifically in Paul Ehrlich's case, he has a clear political agenda that he's pursuing using fear tactics. He didn't make a prediction, he made MANY of them, all Doomsday Catastrophic predictions about then End of Humanity...50 years ago! The guy is a joke. Sometime's it actually is appropriate to question the source.

Comment I read this book... (Score 1) 265

I'd say the rule is: the more subjective the field, the more the field will cling to arbitrary paradigms waiting for the next generation to replace the current. Pure mathematics suffers from this the least (logic with little room for speculation, interpretation, etc), but all of Science suffers from paradigm inertia even in the face of contradictory evidence because it is practiced by humans with egos and careers and belief systems.

Slashdot Top Deals

It is masked but always present. I don't know who built to it. It came before the first kernel.